Recently, someone recommended I read The Truth of Fact, The Truth of Feeling by Ted Chiang. Just finished it about an hour ago. I liked it a lot.
Loyalty artificially superimposed needs scaffolding made from talk.
Loyalty felt in the bones needs not make a sound.
Hypothesis: A big march for cause X will contribute to the eventual success of X.
- Define X carefully
- Find independent and identical (or nearly-identical) places where X is being supported and stage a march in some of those places and not others.
- Wait to see outcomes and determine statistical significance of any differences between places with marches and places without.
- Examine possible confounds and alternative explanations for statistically different outcomes.
- Submit to peer review.
What the Marchers for Science did:
- Define “for science” as anything positively related to nerds, anti-Trumpism, feminism and other fashionable identitarian conceits, Christianity-bashing, engineering, technology, cute puns based on words you learn in science class, immigration enthusiasm, catastrophic anthropomorphic global warming (obviously), and a bunch of other incongruent stuff.
- Stage marches friggin’ everywhere.
- Take no measurements, just post a lot of pictures to social media and repost news stories and argue about them in Facebook comments.
- Don’t think about whether the march was a success because success was never defined.
- Pat themselves on the back and go home.
I learned something from this, but it isn’t something any journal would publish.
One problem with the web is that it is largely built by people who are generally optimistic and naive; they think the whole world is like their college dorm was, or like neighborhood or workplace is, where everyone they meet is courteous, conscientious, or at least tidy and bright. (Silicon Valley bigwigs have a left-libertarian streak, of course.) In reality though, humans by and large are glorified apes, so you wind up with everything devolving toward 4chan and Facebook killers.
ACTUAL related posts:
There are people out there who believe whites are being genocided–a ridiculous notion given that by far the #1 reason the white proportion of the population is shrinking is because whites are choosing to have fewer children.
I wonder, what is the total fertility rate among white genocide believers? No data exist, but if it could somehow be collected I would bet with 90% confidence it is lower than 2, and with 65% confidence it is lower than 1.
As I’ve said before, having children is the surest way to create a future society that is to your liking.
If you’re going to ask people to accept extraordinary claims about yourself, then accept the extraordinary amount of effort it will take them to do so.
An informed critic of X will spend most of his time defending X against ignorant critics of X, to whom the informed critic of X will be indistinguishable from X’s supporters.
It is as hard for most people to maintain a nuanced position between worship and hatred as it is to believe others are capable of the same.
Reality often accommodates contradictory beliefs and frequently even provides evidence that supports all of them. Thus intelligent, informed people can hold opposing beliefs on basically everything.
Now put yourself in the shoes of one of those intelligent, informed people whose beliefs contradict most of those underpinning our modern/liberal/global/egalitarian/democratic Western society. What are your practical options to get through life? Or would you take no practical option and just “cope”?
What annoys me lately is when those people’s goals suggest they should seriously pursue practical options, but their actions are pure coping instead.